Chapter 3 Transport Layer - 國立臺灣大學homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~pollyhuang/teach/intro-cn... ·...

Transport Layer 3-1

Chapter 3 Transport Layer

Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach , 6th edition. Jim Kurose, Keith Ross Addison-Wesley, March 2012.

A note on the use of these ppt slides: We’re making these slides freely available to all (faculty, students, readers). They’re in PowerPoint form so you can add, modify, and delete slides (including this one) and slide content to suit your needs. They obviously represent a lot of work on our part. In return for use, we only ask the following: q  If you use these slides (e.g., in a class) in substantially unaltered form, that you mention their source (after all, we’d like people to use our book!) q  If you post any slides in substantially unaltered form on a www site, that you note that they are adapted from (or perhaps identical to) our slides, and note our copyright of this material.

Thanks and enjoy! JFK/KWR All material copyright 1996-2012 J.F Kurose and K.W. Ross, All Rights Reserved

Transport Layer 3-2

Chapter 3: Transport Layer Our goals: ❒  understand principles

behind transport layer services: ❍  multiplexing/

demultiplexing ❍  reliable data transfer ❍  flow control ❍  congestion control

❒  learn about transport layer protocols in the Internet: ❍  UDP: connectionless

transport ❍  TCP: connection-oriented

transport ❍  TCP congestion control

Transport Layer 3-3

Chapter 3 outline

❒  3.1 Transport-layer services

❒  3.2 Multiplexing and demultiplexing

❒  3.3 Connectionless transport: UDP

❒  3.4 Principles of reliable data transfer

❒  3.5 Connection-oriented transport: TCP ❍  segment structure ❍  reliable data transfer ❍  flow control ❍  connection management

❒  3.6 Principles of congestion control

❒  3.7 TCP congestion control

Transport Layer 3-4

Transport services and protocols ❒  provide logical communication

between app processes running on different hosts

❒  transport protocols run in end systems ❍  send side: breaks app

messages into segments, passes to network layer

❍  rcv side: reassembles segments into messages, passes to app layer

❒  more than one transport protocol available to apps ❍  Internet: TCP and UDP

application transport network data link physical


Transport Layer 3-5

Transport vs. network layer

❒  network layer: logical communication between computers

❒  transport layer: logical communication between processes ❍  relies on, enhances,

network layer services

Household analogy: 12 kids sending letters to

12 kids ❒  processes = kids ❒  app messages = letters

in envelopes ❒  hosts = houses ❒  transport protocol =

Ann and Bill (parents) ❒  network-layer protocol

= postal service

Transport Layer 3-6

Internet transport-layer protocols

❒  reliable, in-order delivery (TCP) ❍  congestion control ❍  flow control ❍  connection setup

❒  unreliable, unordered delivery: UDP ❍  no-frills extension of

“best-effort” IP ❒  services not available:

❍  delay guarantees ❍  bandwidth guarantees


network data link physical







Transport Layer 3-7

Chapter 3 outline








Transport Layer 3-8

Multiplexing/demultiplexing

application

transport

network

link

physical

P1 application

transport

network

link

physical

application

transport

network

link

physical

P2 P3 P4 P1

host 1 host 2 host 3

= process = socket

delivering received segments to correct socket

Demultiplexing at rcv host: gathering data from multiple sockets, enveloping data with header (later used for demultiplexing)

Multiplexing at send host:

Quiz Time!

Transport Layer 3-9

Transport Layer 3-10

How demultiplexing works ❒  host receives IP datagrams

❍  each datagram has source IP address, destination IP address

❍  each datagram carries 1 transport-layer segment

❍  each segment has source, destination port number (recall: well-known port numbers for specific applications)

❒  host uses IP addresses & port numbers to direct segment to appropriate socket

source port # dest port # 32 bits

application data

(message)

other header fields

TCP/UDP segment format


Connectionless demultiplexing

❒  UDP socket identified by two-tuple:

(dest IP address, dest port number)

❒  When host receives UDP segment: ❍  checks destination port

number in segment ❍  directs UDP segment to

socket with that port number

❒  IP datagrams with different source IP addresses and/or source port numbers directed to same socket


Connectionless demux (cont)

Client IP:B

P2

client IP: A

P1 P1 P3

server IP: C

SP: 6428 DP: 9157

SP: 9157 DP: 6428

SP: 6428 DP: 5775

SP: 5775 DP: 6428

SP provides “return address”


Connection-oriented demux

❒  TCP socket identified by 4-tuple: ❍  source IP address ❍  source port number ❍  dest IP address ❍  dest port number

❒  recv host uses all four values to direct segment to appropriate socket

❒  Server host may support many simultaneous TCP sockets: ❍  each socket identified by

its own 4-tuple ❒  Web servers have

different sockets for each connecting client ❍  non-persistent HTTP will

have different socket for each request


Connection-oriented demux (cont)

Client IP:B

P1

client IP: A

P1 P2 P4

server IP: C

SP: 9157 DP: 80

SP: 9157 DP: 80

P5 P6 P3

D-IP:C S-IP: A D-IP:C

S-IP: B

SP: 5775 DP: 80

D-IP:C S-IP: B


Connection-oriented demux: Threaded Web Server

Client IP:B

P1

client IP: A

P1 P2

server IP: C

SP: 9157 DP: 80

SP: 9157 DP: 80

P4 P3

D-IP:C S-IP: A D-IP:C

S-IP: B

SP: 5775 DP: 80

D-IP:C S-IP: B


Chapter 3 outline









UDP: User Datagram Protocol [RFC 768] ❒  “no frills,” “bare bones”

Internet transport protocol

❒  “best effort” service, UDP segments may be: ❍  lost ❍  delivered out of order

to app ❒  connectionless:

❍  no handshaking between UDP sender, receiver

❍  each UDP segment handled independently of others

Why is there a UDP?


UDP: User Datagram Protocol [RFC 768] ❒  “no frills,” “bare bones”

Internet transport protocol

❒  “best effort” service, UDP segments may be: ❍  lost ❍  delivered out of order

to app ❒  connectionless:

❍  no handshaking between UDP sender, receiver

❍  each UDP segment handled independently of others

Why is there a UDP? ❒  no connection

establishment (which can add delay)

❒  simple: no connection state at sender, receiver

❒  small segment header ❒  no congestion control: UDP

can blast away as fast as desired


UDP: more ❒  often used for streaming

multimedia apps ❍  loss tolerant ❍  rate sensitive

❒  other UDP uses ❍  DNS ❍  SNMP

❒  reliable transfer over UDP: add reliability at application layer ❍  application-specific

error recovery!

source port # dest port #

32 bits

Application data

(message)

UDP segment format

length checksum Length, in

bytes of UDP segment, including

header


UDP checksum

Sender: ❒  treat segment contents as

sequence of 16-bit integers

❒  checksum: addition (1’s complement sum) of segment contents

❒  sender puts checksum value into UDP checksum field

Receiver: ❒  compute checksum of

received segment ❒  check if computed checksum

equals checksum field value: ❍  NO - error detected ❍  YES - no error detected.

But maybe errors nonetheless? More later ….

Goal: detect “errors” (e.g., flipped bits) in transmitted segment


Internet Checksum Example ❒  Note

❍ When adding numbers, a carryout from the most significant bit needs to be added to the result

❒  Example: add two 16-bit integers

1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1

1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1

wraparound

sum checksum


Chapter 3 outline









Principles of Reliable data transfer ❒  important in app., transport, link layers ❒  top-10 list of important networking topics!

❒  characteristics of unreliable channel will determine complexity of reliable data transfer protocol (rdt)


Reliable data transfer: getting started

send side

receive side

rdt_send(): called from above, (e.g., by app.). Passed data to deliver to receiver upper layer

udt_send(): called by rdt, to transfer packet over

unreliable channel to receiver

rdt_rcv(): called when packet arrives on rcv-side of channel

deliver_data(): called by rdt to deliver data to upper layer


Reliable data transfer: getting started We’ll: ❒  incrementally develop sender, receiver sides of

reliable data transfer protocol (rdt) ❒  consider only unidirectional data transfer

❍  but control info will flow on both directions! ❒  use finite state machines (FSM) to specify

sender, receiver

state 1

state 2

event causing state transition actions taken on state transition

state: when in this “state” next state

uniquely determined by next event

event actions


Rdt1.0: reliable transfer over a reliable channel ❒  underlying channel perfectly reliable

❍  no bit errors ❍  no loss of packets

❒  separate FSMs for sender, receiver: ❍  sender sends data into underlying channel ❍  receiver read data from underlying channel

Wait for call from

above packet = make_pkt(data) udt_send(packet)

rdt_send(data) extract (packet,data) deliver_data(data)

Wait for call from

below

rdt_rcv(packet)

sender receiver


Rdt2.0: channel with bit errors ❒  underlying channel may flip bits in packet

❍  Q: how to detect bit errors? ❍  recall: UDP checksum to detect bit errors

❒  the question: how to recover from errors: ❍  acknowledgements (ACKs): receiver explicitly tells sender that

packet received OK ❍  negative acknowledgements (NAKs): receiver explicitly tells

sender that packet had errors ❍  sender retransmits pkt on receipt of NAK ❍  human scenarios using ACKs, NAKs?

❒  new mechanisms in rdt2.0 (beyond rdt1.0): ❍  error detection ❍  receiver feedback: control messages (ACK,NAK) receiver-

>sender


rdt2.0: FSM specification

Wait for call from

above

snkpkt = make_pkt(data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt)

extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) udt_send(ACK)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt)

udt_send(sndpkt)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && isNAK(rcvpkt)

udt_send(NAK)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && corrupt(rcvpkt)

Wait for ACK or

NAK

Wait for call from

below sender

receiver rdt_send(data)

Λ


rdt2.0: operation with no errors

Wait for call from

above





udt_send(sndpkt)


udt_send(NAK)


Wait for ACK or

NAK

Wait for call from

below

rdt_send(data)

Λ


rdt2.0: error scenario

Wait for call from

above





udt_send(sndpkt)


udt_send(NAK)


Wait for ACK or

NAK

Wait for call from

below

rdt_send(data)

Λ


rdt2.0 has a fatal flaw!

What happens if ACK/NAK corrupted?

❒  sender doesn’t know what happened at receiver!

What to do? ❒  Q?


rdt2.0 has a fatal flaw!

What happens if ACK/NAK corrupted?

❒  sender doesn’t know what happened at receiver!

What to do? ❒  sender ACKs/NAKs

receiver’s ACK/NAK? What if this sender ACK/NAK corrupted?... (see an end?)

❒  retransmit anyway, but this might cause retransmission of correctly received packet!

Handling duplicates: ❒  sender adds sequence

number to each packet ❒  sender retransmits current

packet if ACK/NAK garbled ❒  receiver discards (doesn’t

deliver up) duplicate packet

Sender sends one packet, then waits for receiver response

stop and wait


rdt2.1: sender, handles garbled ACK/NAKs

Wait for call 0 from

above

sndpkt = make_pkt(0, data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt)

rdt_send(data)

Wait for ACK or NAK 0 udt_send(sndpkt)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && ( corrupt(rcvpkt) || isNAK(rcvpkt) )


rdt_send(data)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt)

udt_send(sndpkt)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && ( corrupt(rcvpkt) || isNAK(rcvpkt) )

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt)


above

Wait for ACK or NAK 1

ΛΛ


rdt2.1: receiver, handles garbled ACK/NAKs

Wait for 0 from below

sndpkt = make_pkt(NAK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && not corrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq0(rcvpkt)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq1(rcvpkt)

extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt)


rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq0(rcvpkt)

extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && (corrupt(rcvpkt)

sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && not corrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq1(rcvpkt)


sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt)

sndpkt = make_pkt(NAK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt)

Quiz Time!



rdt2.1: discussion

Sender: ❒  sequence # added to

packet ❒  two sequence #’s (0,1)

will suffice. Why? ❒  must check if received

ACK/NAK corrupted ❒  twice as many states

❍  state must “remember” whether “current” packet has 0 or 1 sequence #

Receiver: ❒  must check if received

packet is duplicate ❍  state indicates whether

0 or 1 is expected packet sequence #

❒  note: receiver can not know if its last ACK/NAK received OK at sender


rdt2.2: a NAK-free protocol

❒  same functionality as rdt2.1, using ACKs only ❒  instead of NAK, receiver sends ACK for last packet

received OK ❍  receiver must explicitly include sequence # of packet being

ACKed ❒  duplicate ACK at sender results in same action as

NAK: retransmit current packet


rdt2.2: sender, receiver fragments


above


rdt_send(data)

udt_send(sndpkt)

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && ( corrupt(rcvpkt) || isACK(rcvpkt,1) )

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt,0)

Wait for ACK

0

sender FSM fragment


rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq1(rcvpkt) extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK1, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt)


receiver FSM fragment

Λ

sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK?, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt)


rdt2.2: sender, receiver fragments


above


rdt_send(data)

udt_send(sndpkt)



Wait for ACK

0

sender FSM fragment


rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq1(rcvpkt) extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK1, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt)


receiver FSM fragment

Λ

sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK1, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt)

Quiz Time!



rdt3.0: channels with errors and loss

New assumption: underlying channel can also lose packets (data or ACKs) ❍  checksum, seq. #, ACKs,

retransmissions will be of help, but not enough

Q: how to deal with loss? ❍  sender waits until

certain data or ACK lost, then retransmits

❍  yuck: drawbacks?

Approach: sender waits “reasonable” amount of time for ACK

❒  retransmits if no ACK received in this time

❒  if pkt (or ACK) just delayed (not lost): ❍  retransmission will be

duplicate, but use of seq. #’s already handles this

❍  receiver must specify seq # of pkt being ACKed

❒  requires countdown timer


rdt3.0 sender sndpkt = make_pkt(0, data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt) start_timer

rdt_send(data)

Wait for

ACK0



above

sndpkt = make_pkt(1, data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt) start_timer

rdt_send(data)




stop_timer stop_timer

udt_send(sndpkt) (re)start_timer

timeout

udt_send(sndpkt) (re)start_timer

timeout

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt)


above

Wait for

ACK1

Λrdt_rcv(rcvpkt)

ΛΛ

Λ


rdt3.0 in action


Performance of rdt3.0

❒  rdt3.0 works, but performance stinks ❒  example: 1 Gbps link, 15 ms e-e prop. delay, 1KB packet:

T transmit = 8kb/pkt 10**9 b/sec = 8 microsec

❍  U sender: utilization – fraction of time sender busy sending

U sender =

.008 30.008

= 0.00027 microseconds

L / R RTT + L / R

=

L (packet length in bits) R (transmission rate, bps) =

❍  1KB pkt every 30 msec -> 33kB/sec thruput over 1 Gbps link ❍  network protocol limits use of physical resources!


rdt3.0: stop-and-wait operation

first packet bit transmitted, t = 0

sender receiver

RTT

last packet bit transmitted, t = L / R

first packet bit arrives last packet bit arrives, send ACK

ACK arrives, send next packet, t = RTT + L / R

U sender =

.008 30.008


L / R RTT + L / R

=


Pipelined protocols Pipelining: sender allows multiple, “in-flight”, yet-to-

be-acknowledged packets ❍  range of sequence numbers must be increased ❍  buffering at sender and/or receiver

❒  Two generic forms of pipelined protocols: go-Back-N, selective repeat


Pipelining: increased utilization

first packet bit transmitted, t = 0

sender receiver

RTT

last bit transmitted, t = L / R

first packet bit arrives last packet bit arrives, send ACK

ACK arrives, send next packet, t = RTT + L / R

last bit of 2nd packet arrives, send ACK last bit of 3rd packet arrives, send ACK

U sender =

.024 30.008


3 * L / R RTT + L / R

=

Increase utilization by a factor of 3!


Go-Back-N Sender: ❒  Sequence # in packet header, k-bit ❒  “window” of up to N, consecutive unack’ed packets allowed

❒  ACK(n): ACKs all packets up to, including sequence # n ❍  Cumulative ACK

❒  Timer for each in-flight packet batch (per send_base) ❒  timeout(n): retransmit packet n and all higher sequence #

packets in window (send_base to nextseqnum)


GBN: sender extended FSM

Wait (re)start_timer udt_send(sndpkt[base]) udt_send(sndpkt[base+1]) … udt_send(sndpkt[nextseqnum-1])

timeout

rdt_send(data) if (nextseqnum < base+N) { sndpkt[nextseqnum] = make_pkt(nextseqnum,data,chksum) udt_send(sndpkt[nextseqnum]) if (base == nextseqnum) start_timer nextseqnum++ } else refuse_data(data)

base = getacknum(rcvpkt)+1 If (base == nextseqnum) stop_timer (no pkt outstanding) else { stop_timer (for the old base) start_timer (for the new base) }

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && isNEWACK (rcvpkt)

base=1 nextseqnum=1

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && (corrupt(rcvpkt) || isOLDACK(rcvpkt))

Λ


GBN: receiver extended FSM

❒  Principle: ❍  if it’s the expected data packet, send ACK ❍  Else, send NAK

❒  Making it ACK-only: ❍  Send ACK for correctly-received packet with highest in-order

sequence # •  Need to remember expectedseqnum

❍  For corrupted or out-of-order packet: •  discard (don’t buffer) -> no receiver buffering! •  ACK packet with highest in-order sequence #

expectedseqnum=1

ΛWait

rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcurrupt(rcvpkt) && isEXPECTED(rcvpkt)

extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(expectedseqnum,ACK,chksum) udt_send(sndpkt) expectedseqnum++

udt_send(sndpkt) default


GBN in action


Selective Repeat ❒  Actually easier to understand ❒  Receiver individually acknowledges all correctly

received packets ❍  buffers packets, as needed, for eventual in-order

delivery to upper layer ❒  Sender only re-sends packets for which ACK not

received ❍  sender timer for each unACKed packet

❒  Sender window ❍  N consecutive sequence #’s ❍  again limits sequence #s of sent, unACKed packets


Selective repeat: sender, receiver windows


Selective repeat

Data from above : ❒  If next available sequence

# in window, send packet ACK(n) in [sendbase,sendbase

+N-1]: ❒  Mark packet n as received ❒  If n smallest unACKed

packet, advance window base to next unACKed sequence #

timeout(n): ❒  Resend packet n, restart

timer

sender pkt n in [rcvbase, rcvbase+N-1] ❒  Send ACK(n) ❒  Out-of-order: buffer ❒  In-order: deliver (also

deliver buffered, in-order packets), advance window to next not-yet-received packet

pkt n in [rcvbase-N, rcvbase-1] ❒  Send ACK(n) otherwise: ❒  Ignore

receiver


Selective repeat in action


Selective repeat: dilemma Example: ❒  sequence #’s: 0, 1, 2, 3 ❒  window size=3

❒  receiver sees no difference in two scenarios!

❒  incorrectly passes duplicate data as new in (a)

Q: what relationship between sequence # size and window size?

Quiz Time!



Chapter 3 outline









TCP: Overview RFCs: 793, 1122, 1323, 2018, 2581 ❒  full duplex data:

❍  bi-directional data flow in same connection

❍  MSS: maximum segment size

❒  connection-oriented: ❍  handshaking (exchange

of control messages) init’s sender, receiver state before data exchange

❒  flow controlled: ❍  sender will not

overwhelm receiver

❒  point-to-point: ❍  one sender, one receiver

❒  reliable, in-order byte stream: ❍  no “message boundaries”

❒  pipelined: ❍  TCP congestion and flow

control set window size ❒  send & receive buffers

socketdoor

TCPsend buffer

TCPreceive buffer

socketdoor

segment

applicationwrites data

applicationreads data


TCP segment structure

source port # dest port #

32 bits

application data

(variable length)

sequence number acknowledgement number

Receive window

Urg data pnter checksum F S R P A U head

len not used

Options (variable length)

URG: urgent data (generally not used)

ACK: ACK # valid

PSH: push data now (generally not used)

RST, SYN, FIN: connection estab (setup, teardown

commands)

Internet checksum

(as in UDP)

# bytes rcvr willing to accept

counting by bytes of data (not segments!)


TCP seq. #’s and ACKs Seq. #’s:

❍  byte stream “number” of first byte in segment’s data

ACKs: ❍  seq # of next byte

expected from other side

❍  cumulative ACK

Host A Host B

Seq=42, ACK=79, data = ‘C’

Seq=79, ACK=43, data = ‘C’

Seq=43, ACK=80

User types

‘C’

host ACKs receipt

of echoed ‘C’

host ACKs receipt of ‘C’, echoes

back ‘C’

time

simple telnet scenario


TCP Round Trip Time and Timeout Q: how to set TCP

timeout value? ❒  1 sec? 1 min? Or else? ❒  too short? ❒  too long?


TCP Round Trip Time and Timeout Q: how to set TCP

timeout value? ❒  longer than RTT

❍  but RTT varies ❒  too short: premature

timeout ❍  unnecessary

retransmissions ❒  too long: slow reaction

to segment loss

Q: how to estimate RTT? ❒  SampleRTT: measured time from

segment transmission until ACK receipt ❍  ignore retransmissions ❍  Why?

❒  SampleRTT will vary, want estimated RTT “smoother” ❍  How? ❍  average several recent

measurements, not just current SampleRTT


TCP Round Trip Time and Timeout EstimatedRTT = (1- α)*EstimatedRTT + α*SampleRTT

❒  Exponential weighted moving average ❒  influence of past sample decreases exponentially fast ❒  typical value: α = 0.125


Example RTT estimation: RTT: gaia.cs.umass.edu to fantasia.eurecom.fr

100

150

200

250

300

350

1 8 15 22 29 36 43 50 57 64 71 78 85 92 99 106

time (seconnds)

RTT

(mill

iseco

nds)

SampleRTT Estimated RTT


TCP Round Trip Time and Timeout Setting the timeout ❒  EstimtedRTT plus “safety margin”

❍  large variation in EstimatedRTT -> larger safety margin ❒  first estimate of how much SampleRTT deviates from

EstimatedRTT:

TimeoutInterval = EstimatedRTT + 4*DevRTT

DevRTT = (1-β)*DevRTT + β*|SampleRTT-EstimatedRTT| (typically, β = 0.25)

Then set timeout interval:


Chapter 3 outline









TCP reliable data transfer

❒  TCP creates rdt service on top of IP’s unreliable service

❒  Pipelined segments ❒  Cumulative acks ❒  TCP uses single

retransmission timer

❒  Retransmissions are triggered by: ❍  timeout events ❍  duplicate acks

❒  Initially consider simplified TCP sender: ❍  ignore duplicate acks ❍  ignore flow control,

congestion control


TCP sender events: data rcvd from app: ❒  Create segment with

seq # ❒  seq # is byte-stream

number of first data byte in segment

❒  start timer if not already running (think of timer as for oldest unacked segment)

❒  expiration interval: TimeOutInterval

timeout: ❒  retransmit segment

that caused timeout ❒  restart timer Ack rcvd: ❒  If acknowledges

previously unacked segments ❍  update what is known to

be acked ❍  start timer if there are

outstanding segments


TCP sender (simplified)

NextSeqNum = InitialSeqNum SendBase = InitialSeqNum loop (forever) { switch(event) event: data received from application above create TCP segment with sequence number NextSeqNum if (timer currently not running) start timer pass segment to IP NextSeqNum = NextSeqNum + length(data) event: timer timeout retransmit not-yet-acknowledged segment from smallest sequence number start timer event: ACK received, with ACK field value of y if (y > SendBase) { SendBase = y if (there are currently not-yet-acknowledged segments) (re)start timer } } /* end of loop forever */


TCP: retransmission scenarios Host A

Seq=100, 20 bytes data

time

premature timeout

Host B



Seq=

92 t

imeo

ut

Host A


ACK=100

loss

tim

eout

lost ACK scenario

Host B

X


ACK=100

time

SendBase = 100

Seq=

92 t

imeo

ut

Sendbase = 92

Sendbase = 100

SendBase = 120

SendBase = 120


TCP retransmission scenarios (more) Host A


ACK=100

loss

tim

eout

Cumulative ACK scenario

Host B

X


ACK=120

time

SendBase = 120


TCP ACK generation [RFC 1122, RFC 2581]

Event at Receiver Arrival of in-order segment with expected seq #. All data up to expected seq # already ACKed Arrival of in-order segment with expected seq #. One other segment has ACK pending Arrival of out-of-order segment higher-than-expect seq. # . Gap detected Arrival of segment that partially or completely fills gap

TCP Receiver action Delayed ACK. Wait up to 500ms for next segment. If no next segment, send ACK Immediately send single cumulative ACK, ACKing both in-order segments Immediately send duplicate ACK, indicating seq. # of next expected byte Immediate send ACK, provided that segment starts at lower end of gap


Fast Retransmit

❒  Time-out period often relatively long: ❍  long delay before

resending lost packet ❒  Detect lost segments

via duplicate ACKs. ❍  Sender often sends

many segments back-to-back

❍  If segment is lost, there will likely be many duplicate ACKs.

❒  If sender receives 3 dup ACKs for the same data, it supposes that segment after ACKed data was lost: ❍  fast retransmit: resend

segment before timer expires


Host A

tim

eout

Host B

time

X

resend 2nd segment

Figure 3.37 Resending a segment after triple duplicate ACK


event: ACK received, with ACK field value of y if (y > SendBase) { SendBase = y if (there are currently not-yet-acknowledged segments) start timer } else { increment count of dup ACKs received for y if (count of dup ACKs received for y = 3) { resend segment with sequence number y }

Fast retransmit algorithm:

a duplicate ACK for already ACKed segment

fast retransmit


Chapter 3 outline









TCP Flow Control

❒  receiver side of TCP connection has a receive buffer:

❒  speed-matching service: matching the send rate to the receiving app’s drain rate

❒  app process may be slow at reading from buffer

sender won’t overflow receiver’s buffer by

transmitting too much, too fast

flow control


TCP Flow control: how it works

(Suppose TCP receiver discards out-of-order segments)

❒  spare room in buffer = RcvWindow = RcvBuffer-[LastByteRcvd -

LastByteRead]

❒  Rcvr advertises spare room by including value of RcvWindow in segments

❒  Sender limits unACKed data to RcvWindow ❍  guarantees receive

buffer doesn’t overflow


Chapter 3 outline









TCP Connection Management Recall: TCP sender, receiver

establish “connection” before exchanging data segments

❒  initialize TCP variables: ❍  seq. #s ❍  buffers, flow control

info (e.g. RcvWindow)

❒  client: connection initiator connect(); ❒  server: contacted by client listen();

Three way handshake: Step 1: client host sends TCP

SYN segment to server ❍  specifies initial seq # ❍  no data

Step 2: server host receives SYN, replies with SYNACK segment ❍  server allocates buffers ❍  specifies server initial seq.

# Step 3: client receives SYNACK,

replies with ACK segment, which may contain data


TCP Connection Management (cont.) Closing a connection: client closes socket:

close();

Step 1: client end system sends TCP FIN control segment to server

Step 2: server receives FIN, replies with ACK. Closes connection, sends FIN.

client

FIN

server

ACK

ACK

FIN

close

close

closed ti

med

wai

t


TCP Connection Management (cont.)

Step 3: client receives FIN, replies with ACK.

❍  Enters “timed wait” - will respond with ACK to received FINs

Step 4: server, receives ACK. Connection closed.

Note: with small modification, can handle simultaneous FINs.

client

FIN

server

ACK

ACK

FIN

closing

closing

closed ti

med

wai

t

closed


TCP Connection Management (cont)

TCP client lifecycle

TCP server lifecycle


Chapter 3 outline









Principles of Congestion Control

Congestion: ❒  informally: “too many sources sending too much

data too fast for network to handle” ❒  different from flow control! ❒  manifestations:

❍  lost packets (buffer overflow at routers) ❍  long delays (queuing in router buffers)

❒  a top-10 problem!


Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 1 ❒  two senders, two

receivers ❒  one router,

infinite buffers ❒  no retransmission

❒  maximum achievable throughput

❒  large delays when congested

unlimited shared output link buffers

Host A λin : original data

Host B

λout


Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 2 ❒  one router, finite buffers ❒  sender retransmission of lost packet

finite shared output link buffers


Host B

λout

λ'in : original data, plus retransmitted data

Application Layer

Transport Layer


Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 2 ❒  “perfect” case, always: (goodput) ❒  retransmission only when loss:

❒  retransmission of lost packet makes larger (than perfect case) for same

λin

λout >

λin

λout

λin

λout =

“costs” of congestion: ❒  more work (retransmission) for given “goodput” ❒  unneeded retransmissions: link carries multiple copies of pkt


Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 3 ❒  Four senders ❒  Multi-hop paths ❒  Timeout/retransmit

λin

Q: what happens as and increase ? λ

in

finite shared output link buffers


Host B

λout

λ'in : original data, plus retransmitted data


Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 3

Another “cost” of congestion: ❒  when packet gets dropped, any “upstream”

transmission capacity used for that packet was wasted!

Host A

Host B

λout


Message: Congestion is bad

But what can we do about it?

Quiz Time!



Approaches towards congestion control

End-end congestion control:

❒  no explicit feedback from network

❒  congestion inferred from end-system observed loss, delay

❒  approach taken by TCP

Network-assisted congestion control:

❒  routers provide feedback to end systems ❍  single bit indicating

congestion (SNA, DECbit, TCP/IP ECN, ATM)

❍  tells explicit rate that sender should send at

Two broad approaches towards congestion control:


Chapter 3 outline









TCP AIMD

8 Kbytes

16 Kbytes

24 Kbytes

time

congestionwindow

multiplicative decrease: cut CongWin in half after loss event

additive increase: increase CongWin by 1 MSS every RTT in the absence of loss events: probing

Long-lived TCP connection

CongWin = CongWin * 0.5

CongWin = CongWin + 1


TCP Congestion Control

❒  end-end control (no network assistance)

❒  sender limits transmission: LastByteSent-LastByteAcked ≤ CongWin

❒  Roughly,

❒  CongWin is dynamic, a function of perceived network congestion

How does sender perceive congestion?

❒  loss event ❒  How to tell whether

there’s a loss event? ❒  TCP sender reduces

rate (CongWin) after loss event

three mechanisms: ❍  AIMD ❍  slow start ❍  conservative after

timeout events

rate = CongWin

RTT Bytes/sec


TCP Slow Start

❒  When connection begins, CongWin = 1 MSS ❍  Example: ❍  MSS = 500 bytes ❍  RTT = 200 msec ❍  initial rate = 20 kbps

❒  available bandwidth may be >> MSS/RTT ❍  desirable to quickly ramp

up to respectable rate

❒  When connection begins, increase rate exponentially fast until first loss event


TCP Slow Start (more)

❒  When connection begins, increase rate exponentially: ❍  double CongWin every

RTT ❍  done by incrementing CongWin for every ACK received

❒  Summary: initial rate is slow but ramps up exponentially fast

Host A

one segment

RTT

Host B

time

two segments

four segments


Refinement Q: When should the

exponential increase switch to linear?

A: When CongWin gets to 1/2 of its value before timeout.

Implementation: ❒  Variable Threshold ❒  At loss event, Threshold is

set to 1/2 of CongWin just before loss event


Refinement ❒  After 3 dup ACKs:

❍ CongWin is cut in half ❍ window then grows

linearly ❒  But after timeout event:

❍ CongWin instead set to 1 MSS;

❍ window then grows exponentially

❍  to a threshold, then grows linearly

Why Half the CongWin vs. 1?

Philosophy:


Refinement ❒  After 3 dup ACKs:

❍ CongWin is cut in half ❍ window then grows

linearly ❒  But after timeout event:

❍ CongWin instead set to 1 MSS;

❍ window then grows exponentially

❍  to a threshold, then grows linearly

•  3 dup ACKs indicates network capable of delivering some segments •  timeout before 3 dup ACKs is “more alarming”

Philosophy:

Quiz Time!



Summary: TCP Congestion Control

❒  When CongWin is below Threshold, sender in slow-start phase, window grows exponentially.

❒  When CongWin is above Threshold, sender is in congestion-avoidance phase, window grows linearly.

❒  When a triple duplicate ACK occurs, Threshold set to CongWin/2 and CongWin set to Threshold.

❒  When timeout occurs, Threshold set to CongWin/2 and CongWin is set to 1 MSS.


TCP sender congestion control State Event TCP Sender Action Commentary

Slow Start (SS)

ACK receipt for previously unacked data

CongWin = CongWin + MSS, If (CongWin > Threshold) set state to “Congestion Avoidance”

Resulting in a doubling of CongWin every RTT

Congestion Avoidance (CA)

ACK receipt for previously unacked data

CongWin = CongWin+ MSS * (MSS/CongWin)

Additive increase, resulting in increase of CongWin by 1 MSS every RTT

SS or CA Loss event detected by triple duplicate ACK

Threshold = CongWin/2, CongWin = Threshold, Set state to “Congestion Avoidance”

Fast recovery, implementing multiplicative decrease. CongWin will not drop below 1 MSS.

SS or CA Timeout Threshold = CongWin/2, CongWin = 1 MSS, Set state to “Slow Start”

Enter slow start

SS or CA Duplicate ACK

Increment duplicate ACK count for segment being acked

CongWin and Threshold not changed


TCP throughput

❒ What’s the average throughout of TCP as a function of window size and RTT? ❍  Ignore slow start

❒  Let W be the window size when loss occurs. ❒ When window is W, throughput is W/RTT ❒  Just after loss, window drops to W/2,

throughput to W/2RTT. ❒ Average throughout: .75 W/RTT


TCP Futures: TCP over “long, fat pipes”

❒  Example: 1500 byte segments, 100ms RTT, want 10 Gbps throughput

❒  Requires window size W = 83,333 in-flight segments

❒  Throughput in terms of loss rate:

❒  ➜L = 2·10-10 Wow ❒  New versions of TCP for high-speed

LRTTMSS⋅22.1


Fairness goal: if K TCP sessions share same bottleneck link of bandwidth R, each should have average rate of R/K

TCP connection 1

bottleneck router

capacity R

TCP connection 2

TCP Fairness


Why is TCP fair? Two competing sessions: ❒  Additive increase gives slope of 1, as throughout increases ❒  multiplicative decrease decreases throughput proportionally

R

R

equal bandwidth share

Connection 1 throughput

Conn

ecti

on 2

thr

ough

put

congestion avoidance: additive increase

loss: decrease window by factor of 2

congestion avoidance: additive increase loss: decrease window by factor of 2


Fairness (more) Fairness and UDP ❒  Multimedia apps often

do not use TCP ❍  do not want rate

throttled by congestion control

❒  Instead use UDP: ❍  pump audio/video at

constant rate, tolerate packet loss

❒  Research area: TCP friendly

Fairness and parallel TCP connections

❒  nothing prevents app from opening parallel connections between 2 hosts.

❒  Web browsers do this ❒  Example: 9 users, link of rate R

supporting 9 TCP connections; ❍  new app/user asks for 1 TCP,

gets rate R/10 ❍  new app/user asks for 9 TCPs,

gets R/2 !


Chapter 3: Summary ❒  principles behind transport

layer services: ❍ multiplexing,

demultiplexing ❍  reliable data transfer ❍  flow control ❍  congestion control

❒  instantiation and implementation in the Internet ❍ UDP ❍ TCP

Next: ❒  leaving the network

“edge” (application, transport layers)

❒  into the network “core”

Chapter 3 Transport Layer - 國立臺灣大學homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~pollyhuang/teach/intro-cn... ·...

Documents

Transcript of Chapter 3 Transport Layer - 國立臺灣大學homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~pollyhuang/teach/intro-cn... ·...